BDEC vs. QMAR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BDEC (Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - December) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - BDEC is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index December, while QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust. BDEC is passively managed, while QMAR is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, BDEC returned 9.70%/yr vs 11.30%/yr for QMAR. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BDEC charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.

Performance

BDEC vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - December (BDEC) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BDEC achieves a 6.26% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 11.40% return.

BDEC

• 1D: -0.71%
• 1M: -0.32%
• YTD: 6.26%
• 6M: 5.64%
• 1Y: 19.33%
• 3Y*: 14.06%
• 5Y*: 9.70%
• 10Y*: —

QMAR

• 1D: -1.06%
• 1M: -0.77%
• YTD: 11.40%
• 6M: 11.38%
• 1Y: 20.76%
• 3Y*: 15.65%
• 5Y*: 11.30%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BDEC vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BDEC Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - December	6.26%	14.96%	12.71%	19.86%	-9.42%	12.19%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	11.40%	10.89%	16.11%	35.47%	-16.56%	12.87%

Correlation

The correlation between BDEC and QMAR is 0.86, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.86
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.83
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 22, 2021	0.86

The correlation between BDEC and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

BDEC vs. QMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BDEC	QMAR
Technology	38.4%	58.7%
Financial Services	11.0%	0.2%
Communication Services	10.8%	14.3%
Consumer Cyclical	10.0%	11.4%
Healthcare	8.4%	3.7%
Industrials	7.9%	2.6%
Consumer Defensive	4.6%	6.4%
Energy	3.2%	0.5%
Utilities	2.1%	1.2%
Real Estate	1.8%	0.1%
Basic Materials	1.7%	1.0%

Return for Risk

BDEC vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BDEC

BDEC Risk / Return Rank: 73
BDEC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
BDEC Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
BDEC Omega Ratio Rank: 75
BDEC Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
BDEC Martin Ratio Rank: 78

QMAR

QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 95
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 96
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 97

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BDEC vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - December (BDEC) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	BDEC	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.16	3.19	-1.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.03	4.77	-1.74
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.74	-0.33
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.98	6.49	-3.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.99	39.78	-25.79

BDEC vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BDEC Sharpe Ratio is 2.16, which is lower than the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BDEC and QMAR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

BDEC vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BDEC drawdown since its inception was -25.60%, which is greater than QMAR's maximum drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BDEC and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	BDEC	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.60%	-19.83%	-5.77%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.52%	-3.21%	-3.31%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.95%	-15.91%	+1.96%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.44%	-19.83%	+3.39%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.38%	-1.65%	+0.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.03%	-3.26%	+0.23%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.38%	0.52%	+0.86%

Volatility

BDEC vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - December (BDEC) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) have volatilities of 2.82% and 2.92%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BDEC	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.82%	2.92%	-0.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.74%	5.59%	+1.15%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.02%	6.55%	+2.47%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.02%	14.01%	-1.99%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.25%	13.83%	+0.42%

BDEC vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

BDEC has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

BDEC vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither BDEC nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BDEC and QMAR in my portfolio?

BDEC and QMAR have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BDEC or QMAR?

QMAR has higher volatility (2.92%) compared to BDEC (2.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BDEC dropped -25.60% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

Which ETF is better, BDEC or QMAR?

On 5-year performance, QMAR leads with 11.30% vs 9.70% for BDEC. On fees, BDEC is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, BDEC has been the lower-risk option at 2.82%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BDEC or QMAR?

Over the 5-year period, QMAR has performed better with a 11.30% return vs 9.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BDEC or QMAR?

BDEC is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BDEC or QMAR?

BDEC and QMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between BDEC and QMAR?

BDEC is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for BDEC and 0.90% for QMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.19 vs 2.16), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.